PSY 250 University of Phoenix Wk 2 Erikson Eight Stages of Psychosocial Development PPT Hello. I was hoping that you would be able to assist me with this w

PSY 250 University of Phoenix Wk 2 Erikson Eight Stages of Psychosocial Development PPT Hello. I was hoping that you would be able to assist me with this week’s assignment, which is a power point presentation. I have attached the Power Point Presentation Template, Assignments and Requirements Information, as well as the chapters for this week should you need them. Thank you Using This Presentation Template
Instructions for each slide are given in the speaker notes section of the slide. Be sure
that your PowerPoint screen view is set up to show speaker notes.
General Reminders:
•Use brief bullet points on each slide to highlight main ideas.
•Remember to cite and reference any text or paraphrased material that you use to
complete this presentation.
•Longer sentences with detailed information should go into the section for speaker
notes below the slide. Use correct spelling and grammar. Include citations in APA
format as needed.
•Remember to replace prompts and instructions with your own content.
•Delete this slide before submitting your presentation.
Erikson’s Eight Stages of
Psychosocial Development
PSY/250: Psychology of Personality



Introduction to Erikson’s Theory
• People progress through 8 stages of psychosocial development:
1.
2.
3.
4.




5.
6.
7.
8.




• Emphasizes social and historical influences—not just anatomy
• Extends on Freudian psychoanalysis—does not oppose it
Psychoanalytic vs. Psychosocial Theories
SIMILARITIES
DIFFERENCES
•
•
•
•
Stage 1:
•
•
•
•
•

Age Range:

Psychosexual Mode:
Psychosocial Crisis:
Resulting from Crisis:
Compared to Freud:
Stage 2:
•
•
•
•
•

Age Range:

Psychosexual Mode:
Psychosocial Crisis:
Resulting from Crisis:
Compared to Freud:
Stage 3:
•
•
•
•
•

Age Range:

Psychosexual Mode:
Psychosocial Crisis:
Resulting from Crisis:
Compared to Freud:
Stage 4:
•
•
•
•
•

Age Range:

Psychosexual Mode:
Psychosocial Crisis:
Resulting from Crisis:
Compared to Freud:
Stage 5:
•
•
•
•
•

Age Range:

Psychosexual Mode:
Psychosocial Crisis:
Resulting from Crisis:
Compared to Freud:
Stage 6:
•
•
•
•
•

Age Range:

Psychosexual Mode:
Psychosocial Crisis:
Resulting from Crisis:
Compared to Freud:
Stage 7:
•
•
•
•
•

Age Range:

Psychosexual Mode:
Psychosocial Crisis:
Resulting from Crisis:
Compared to Freud:
Stage 8:
•
•
•
•
•

Age Range:

Psychosexual Mode:
Psychosocial Crisis:
Resulting from Crisis:
Compared to Freud:
Social & Cultural Influences on Personality
•
•
•
References
•Feist, J., Feist, G. J., & Roberts, T. (2018). Theories of personality (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. Retrieved from
https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781259951985/epubcfi/6/2[;vnd.vst.idref=cover]!/4/2/2@0:0
•
•
PSY/250: Psychology Of Personality
Wk 2 – Erikson’s Eight Stages of Psychosocial
Development Presentation [
Assignment Content
Materials
Textbook
Feist, J., Feist, G.J., & Roberts, T. (2018). Theories of personality (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill
Education.
Complete the 13-slide Erikson’s Eight Stages of Psychosocial Development presentation template.
Instructions for what to include in the presentation are provided in the speaker notes section for each
slide, which can be accessed by clicking the View tab at the top, then clicking Notes. As you work
through the presentation template, you will replace the instructions in the speaker notes section with
actual speaker notes—that is, sentences that represent what you would say about each slide if you were
to give the presentation in person. Presenter notes should be substantive and have a minimum of 100
words per slide.
A minimum of two (2) references are required and you are reminded to cite the references in the body
of the assignment and then list the references on the reference slide. Your references should be
presented in APA format and the Reference and Citation Generator will be very helpful in that area.
There is a grading rubric for this assignment. Please let me know if you have any questions.
o
o
o
o
Notes:
Ensure that you have installed Microsoft® Office 365 prior to beginning this assignment. The University
provides this for you through PhoenixConnect. If you do not already have this installed, go to Office365
ProPlus & Email Support and follow the 5 steps to install Office365 on your computer.
View PC- PowerPoint 2013 – View Speaker Notes or PC- PowerPoint – View Speaker Notes for a brief
visual demonstration on adding speaker notes to your presentation.
You may conduct a search for PowerPoint tutorials in the Media Library for additional assistance using
Microsoft® PowerPoint®.
You may add pictures and graphics to enhance your presentation, and you are welcome to change the
design layout of the presentation.
Submit your assignment.
CHAPTER 5
Klein: Object Relations Theory
Klein © Keystone-France/Gamma-Keystone/Getty Images
Overview of Object Relations Theory
Biography of Melanie Klein
Introduction to Object Relations Theory
Psychic Life of the Infant
Phantasies
Objects
Positions
Paranoid-Schizoid Position
Depressive Position
Psychic Defense Mechanisms
Introjection
Projection
Splitting
Projective Identification
Internalizations
Ego
Superego
Oedipus Complex
Female Oedipal Development
Male Oedipal Development
Later Views on Object Relations
Margaret Mahler’s View
Heinz Kohut’s View
John Bowlby’s Attachment Theory
Mary Ainsworth and the Strange Situation
Psychotherapy
Related Research
Childhood Trauma and Adult Object Relations
Attachment Theory and Adult Relationships
Critique of Object Relations Theory
Concept of Humanity
Key Terms and Concepts
Melanie Klein, the woman who developed a theory that emphasized the nurturing and loving
relationship between parent and child, had neither a nurturant nor a loving relationship to her
own daughter Melitta. The rift between mother and daughter began early. Melitta was the oldest
of three children born to parents who did not particularly like one another. When Melitta was 15,
her parents separated, and Melitta blamed her mother for this separation and for the divorce that
followed. As Melitta matured, her relationship with her mother became more acrimonious.
After Melitta received a medical degree, underwent a personal analysis, and presented
scholarly papers to the British Psycho-Analytical Society, she was officially a member of that
society, professionally equal to her mother.
Her analyst, Edward Glover, was a bitter rival of Melanie Klein. Glover, who encouraged
Melitta’s independence, was at least indirectly responsible for Melitta’s virulent attacks on her
mother. The animosity between mother and daughter became even more intense when Melitta
married Walter Schmideberg, another analyst who strongly opposed Klein and who openly
supported Anna Freud, Klein’s most bitter rival.
Despite being a full member of the British Psycho-Analytical Society, Melitta Schmideberg
felt that her mother saw her as an appendage, not a colleague. In a strongly worded letter to her
mother in the summer of 1934, Melitta wrote:
I hope you will . . . also allow me to give you some advice. . . . I am very different from you. I
already told you years ago that nothing causes a worse reaction in me than trying to force feelings
into me—it is the surest way to kill all feelings. . . . I am now grown up and must be independent. I
have my own life, my husband. (Quoted in Grosskurth, 1986, p. 199.)
Melitta went on to say that she would no longer relate to her mother in the neurotic manner of
her younger years. She now had a shared profession with her mother and insisted that she be
treated as an equal.
The story of Melanie Klein and her daughter takes on a new perspective in light of the
emphasis that object relations theory places on the importance of the mother-child relationship.
Overview of Object Relations Theory
The object relations theory of Melanie Klein was built on careful observations of young
children. In contrast to Freud, who emphasized the first 4 to 6 years of life, Klein stressed the
importance of the first 4 to 6 months after birth. She insisted that the infant’s drives (hunger, sex,
and so forth) are directed to an object—a breast, a penis, a vagina, and so on. According to
Klein, the child’s relation to the breast is fundamental and serves as a prototype for later relations
to whole objects, such as mother and father. The very early tendency of infants to relate to partial
objects gives their experiences an unrealistic or fantasy-like quality that affects all later
interpersonal relations. Thus, Klein’s ideas tend to shift the focus of psychoanalytic theory from
organically based stages of development to the role of early fantasy in the formation of
interpersonal relationships.
In addition to Klein, other theorists have speculated on the importance of a child’s early
experiences with the mother. Margaret Mahler believed that children’s sense of identity rests on
a Page 144three-step relationship with their mother. First, infants have basic needs cared for by
their mother; next, they develop a safe symbiotic relationship with an all-powerful mother; and
finally, they emerge from their mother’s protective circle and establish their separate
individuality. Heinz Kohut theorized that children develop a sense of self during early infancy
when parents and others treat them as if they had an individualized sense of identity. John
Bowlby investigated infants’ attachment to their mother as well as the negative consequences of
being separated from their mother. Mary Ainsworth and her colleagues developed a technique
for measuring the type of attachment style an infant develops toward its caregiver.
Biography of Melanie Klein
Melanie Reizes Klein was born March 30, 1882, in Vienna, Austria. The youngest of four
children born to Dr. Moriz Reizes and his second wife, Libussa Deutsch Reizes, Klein believed
that her birth was unplanned—a belief that led to feelings of being rejected by her parents. She
felt especially distant to her father, who favored his oldest daughter, Emilie (Sayers, 1991). By
the time Melanie was born, her father had long since rebelled against his early Orthodox Jewish
training and had ceased to practice any religion. As a consequence, Klein grew up in a family
that was neither proreligious nor antireligious.
During her childhood Klein observed both parents working at jobs they did not enjoy. Her
father was a physician who struggled to make a living in medicine and eventually was relegated
to working as a dental assistant. Her mother ran a shop selling plants and reptiles, a difficult,
humiliating, and fearful job for someone who abhorred snakes (H. Segal, 1979). Despite her
father’s meager income as a doctor, Klein aspired to become a physician.
Klein’s early relationships were either unhealthy or ended in tragedy. She felt neglected by
her elderly father, whom she saw as cold and distant, and although she loved and idolized her
mother, she felt suffocated by her. Klein had a special fondness for her older sister Sidonie, who
was 4 years older and who taught Melanie arithmetic and reading. Unfortunately, when Melanie
was 4 years old, Sidonie died. In later years, Klein confessed that she never got over grieving for
Sidonie (H. Segal, 1992). After her sister’s death, Klein became deeply attached to her only
brother, Emmanuel, who was nearly 5 years older and who became her close confidant. She
idolized her brother, and this infatuation may have contributed to her later difficulties in relating
to men. Like Sidonie earlier, Emmanuel tutored Melanie, and his excellent instructions helped
her pass the entrance examinations of a reputable preparatory school (Petot, 1990).
When Klein was 18, her father died, but a greater tragedy occurred 2 years later when her
beloved brother, Emmanuel, died. Emmanuel’s death left Klein devastated. While still in
mourning over her brother’s death, she married Arthur Klein, an engineer who had been
Emmanuel’s close friend. Melanie believed that her marriage at age 21 prevented her from
becoming a physician, and for the rest of her life, she regretted that she had not reached that goal
(Grosskurth, 1986).
Unfortunately, Klein did not have a happy marriage; she dreaded sex and abhorred pregnancy
(Grosskurth, 1986). Nevertheless, her marriage to Arthur produced three children: Page
145Melitta, born in 1904; Hans, born in 1907; and Erich, born in 1914. In 1909, the Kleins
moved to Budapest, where Arthur had been transferred. There, Klein met Sandor Ferenczi, a
member of Freud’s inner circle and the person who introduced her into the world of
psychoanalysis. When her mother died in 1914, Klein became depressed and entered analysis
with Ferenczi, an experience that served as a turning point in her life. That same year she read
Freud’s On Dreams (1901/1953) “and realized immediately that was what I was aiming at, at
least during those years when I was so very keen to find out what would satisfy me intellectually
and emotionally” (quoted in Grosskurth, 1986, p. 69). At about the same time that she discovered
Freud, her youngest child, Erich, was born. Klein was deeply taken by psychoanalysis and
trained her son according to Freudian principles. As part of this training, she began to
psychoanalyze Erich from the time he was very young. In addition, she also attempted to analyze
Melitta and Hans, both of whom eventually went to other analysts. Melitta, who became a
psychoanalyst, was analyzed by Karen Horney (see Chapter 6) as well as by others (Grosskurth,
1986). An interesting parallel between Horney and Klein is that Klein later analyzed Horney’s
two youngest daughters when they were 12 and 9 years old. (Horney’s oldest daughter was 14
and refused to be analyzed.) Unlike Melitta’s voluntary analysis by Horney, the two Horney
children were compelled to attend analytic sessions, not for treatment of any neurotic disorder
but as a preventive measure (Quinn, 1987).
Klein separated from her husband in 1919 but did not obtain a divorce for several years. After
the separation, she established a psychoanalytic practice in Berlin and made her first
contributions to the psychoanalytic literature with a paper dealing with her analysis of Erich,
who was not identified as her son until long after Klein’s death (Grosskurth, 1998). Not
completely satisfied with her own analysis by Ferenczi, she ended the relationship and began an
analysis with Karl Abraham, another member of Freud’s inner circle. After only 14 months,
however, Klein experienced another tragedy when Abraham died. At this point of her life, Klein
decided to begin a self-analysis, one that continued for the remainder of her life. Before 1919,
psychoanalysts, including Freud, based their theories of child development on their therapeutic
work with adults. Freud’s only case study of a child was Little Hans, a boy whom he saw as a
patient only once. Melanie Klein changed that situation by psychoanalyzing children directly.
Her work with very young children, including her own, convinced her that children internalize
both positive and negative feelings toward their mother and that they develop a superego much
earlier than Freud had believed. Her slight divergence from standard psychoanalytic theory
brought much criticism from her colleagues in Berlin, causing her to feel increasingly
uncomfortable in that city. Then, in 1926, Ernest Jones invited her to London to analyze his
children and to deliver a series of lectures on child analysis. These lectures later resulted in her
first book, The Psycho-Analysis of Children (Klein, 1932). In 1927, she took up permanent
residency in England, remaining there until her death on September 22, 1960. On the day of her
memorial service, her daughter Melitta delivered a final posthumous insult by giving a
professional lecture wearing flamboyant red boots, which scandalized many in her audience
(Grosskurth, 1986).
Page 146
Klein’s years in London were marked by division and controversy. Although she continued to
regard herself as a Freudian, neither Freud nor his daughter Anna accepted her emphasis on the
importance of very early childhood or her analytic technique with children. Her differences with
Anna Freud began while the Freuds were still living in Vienna, but they climaxed after Anna
moved with her father and mother to London in 1938. Before the arrival of Anna Freud, the
English school of psychoanalysis was steadily becoming the “Kleinian School,” and Klein’s
battles were limited mostly to those with her daughter, Melitta, and these battles were both fierce
and personal.
In 1934, Klein’s older son, Hans, was killed in a fall. Melitta, who had recently moved to
London with her psychoanalyst husband, Walter Schmideberg, maintained that her brother had
committed suicide, and she blamed her mother for his death. During that same year, Melitta
began an analysis with Edward Glover, one of Klein’s rivals in the British Society. Klein and her
daughter then became even more personally estranged and professionally antagonistic, and
Melitta maintained her animosity even after her mother’s death.
Although Melitta Schmideberg was not a supporter of Anna Freud, her persistent antagonism
toward Klein increased the difficulties of Klein’s struggle with Anna Freud, who never
recognized the possibility of analyzing young children (King & Steiner, 1991; Mitchell & Black,
1995). The friction between Klein and Anna Freud never abated, with each side claiming to be
more “Freudian” than the other (Hughes, 1989). Finally, in 1946 the British Society accepted
three training procedures—the traditional one of Melanie Klein, the one advocated by Anna
Freud, and a Middle Group that accepted neither training school but was more eclectic in its
approach. By such a division, the British Society remained intact, albeit with an uneasy alliance.
Introduction to Object Relations Theory
Object relations theory is an offspring of Freud’s instinct theory, but it differs from its ancestor
in at least three general ways. First, object relations theory places less emphasis on biologically
based drives and more importance on consistent patterns of interpersonal relationships. Second,
as opposed to Freud’s rather paternalistic theory that emphasizes the power and control of the
father, object relations theory tends to be more maternal, stressing the intimacy and nurturing of
the mother. Third, object relations theorists generally see human contact and relatedness—not
sexual pleasure—as the prime motive of human behavior.
More specifically, however, the concept of object relations has many meanings, just as there
are many object relations theorists. This chapter concentrates prima…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment